As a leader, you are bound to make people upset with you at some point.
Whether they are your employees, your lateral peers, or even people above you - you are bound to have opposition if you are doing your job as a true leader.
Not everyone can be happy with you if you are making decisions that could potentially impact their professional lives in some way (ex. how they work, how much they make, how much they work, etc.).
Let's illustrate this with an example:
You are trying to push forward a company-wide initiative to give the front-line workers more autonomy and authority to make decisions. The hope is that that this increase in autonomy and authority will empower your front-line employees to make decisions that will benefit the customer experience. Due to poor customer experience ratings in the past, you believe a move like this will potentially turn that around.
You informally pitch this idea to 3 groups: your direct reports, your lateral peers in other departments, and the CEO. You receive mostly positive feedback from your direct reports, lateral peers, and even the CEO! Maybe you are onto something big that can greatly benefit the organization!
What is surprising is the strong opposition you receive after the fact. The word has spread across the office, and you begin to hear grumblings from your direct report supervisors. While the employees and some of the supervisors loved the idea, a small but vocal minority of supervisors are concerned that the increase in front-line employee authority will be a threat to their jobs.
Equally as surprising is the pushback from the finance department. While most other departments offered support, the director of finance offered pushback in the form of concern for the potential increase in expenses from the front line’s new authority. The increase in refunds, shipping costs, and reduction in service fees was a big concern for the director of finance.
This was surprising to you, as you assumed everyone would understand that the revenue would eventually increase over time.
Creating an opposition is almost inevitable when it comes to being a true leader. This makes sense, as people fear perceived losses with certain changes.
The question then is - what do you do about the opposition?
In simple terms - You have to build bridges with your opposition.
This is much harder in real life than it sounds in theory. In today's polarized world, people like to stick their flag poles on the ground and stand by their ideals. It is becoming more difficult to be pragmatic and agreeable nowadays.
But the fact is, you must be willing to build those bridges anyway. Doing this requires the right frame of thoughts, emotions, and how you execute with the opposing faction. It does you no good to address the opposition with anger and frustration, and assume they are in your way of making progress. It does you equally no good to roll over and give up - as no progress will be made.
Let's go back to the example and see how bridges can be built in the face of adversity:
Frustrated by the opposition, you go to your CEO again to relay the struggles you are having with some of your direct reports and your lateral peers. The CEO advised that this is the consequence of leadership, and it is perfectly normal to expect pushback regardless of how well-intentioned your proposed changes are.
The CEO further advised to meet with each individual in opposition and talk about the points of contention. The CEO advised to approach the conversation with curiosity versus judgment and being reactionary, along with having compassion and empathy for the opposition's perception of the change being proposed.
The final advice the CEO offered was to consider the following for each person in opposition: 1) what are their values? 2) What/who are their loyalties to? 3) What do they stand to lose if the change is implemented?
This example offers quintessential advice on how to approach your opposition; you have to set your judgments and frustrations aside to build bridges. Having an empathetic ear and a curious mindset to what the opposition has to say about their perception goes a long way towards building that bridge, as it shows you want to hear and understand where they are coming from. You may not agree with them, but the point is to hear what they have to say first and start to understand their reasons for opposing the proposed changes you wish to make.
It is helpful to keep a frame of mind towards the opposition's values, loyalties, and potential losses at stake. The opposition's values can be heard and observed with good questions that steer the conversation in that direction. These values drive the why behind what they do. The opposition's loyalties to what or who are just as important as their values. It can be argued that one's loyalties tend to trump many of their values when the going gets rough.
Finally, considering the losses the opposition might have to take means being open to understanding what they fear to lose (or perceive to lose) if your proposed change occurs. Understanding all three points will greatly benefit your ability to build a bridge with the opposition.
By building bridges, you set yourself up for potential common ground found between your opposition and yourself, and thus you can find ways to make changes that may potentially bring them on board down the road. This does not guarantee your change will be successfully implemented - but it increases the chances of that success when you know how to build those bridges between the opposition and yourself!
Comments